Muscarinic acetylcholine receptors (mAChRs) are members of the G protein-coupled receptor superfamily which mediate the actions of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine in both the central and peripheral nervous system. Five mAChR subtypes have been cloned, M1 to M5. The M1 mAChR is predominantly expressed post-synaptically in the cortex, hippocampus, striatum and thalamus; M2 mAChRs are located predominantly in the brainstem and thalamus, though also in the cortex, hippocampus and striatum where they reside on cholinergic synaptic terminals (Langmead et al., 2008 Br J Pharmacol). However, M2 mAChRs are also expressed peripherally on cardiac tissue (where they mediate the vagal innervation of the heart) and in smooth muscle and exocrine glands. M3 mAChRs are expressed at relatively low level in the CNS but are widely expressed in smooth muscle and glandular tissues such as sweat and salivary glands (Langmead et al., 2008 Br J Pharmacol).
Muscarinic receptors in the central nervous system, especially the M1 mAChR, play a critical role in mediating higher cognitive processing. Diseases associated with cognitive impairments, such as Alzheimer's disease, are accompanied by loss of cholinergic neurons in the basal forebrain (Whitehouse et al., 1982 Science). In schizophrenia, which also has cognitive impairment as an important component of the clinical picture, mAChR density is reduced in the pre-frontal cortex, hippocampus and caudate putamen of schizophrenic subjects (Dean et al., 2002 Mol Psychiatry). Furthermore, in animal models, blockade or damage to central cholinergic pathways results in profound cognitive deficits and non-selective mAChR antagonists have been shown to induce psychotomimetic effects in psychiatric patients. Cholinergic replacement therapy has largely been based on the use of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors to prevent the breakdown of endogenous acetylcholine. These compounds have shown efficacy versus symptomatic cognitive decline in the clinic, but give rise to dose-limiting adverse events resulting from stimulation of peripheral M2 and M3 mAChRs including disturbed gastrointestinal motility, bradycardia, nausea and vomiting (http://www.drugs.com/pro/donepezil.html; http://www.drugs.com/pro/rivastigmine.html).
Further discovery efforts have targeted the identification of direct M1 mAChR agonists with the aim of inducing selective improvements in cognitive function with a favourable adverse effect profile. Such efforts resulted in the identification of a range of agonists, exemplified by compounds such as xanomeline, AF267B, sabcomeline, milameline and cevimeline. Many of these compounds have been shown to be highly effective in pre-clinical models of cognition in both rodents and/or non-human primates. Milameline has shown efficacy versus scopolamine-induced deficits in working and spatial memory in rodents; sabcomeline displayed efficacy in a visual object discrimination task in marmosets and xanomeline reversed mAChR antagonist-induced deficits in cognitive performance in a passive avoidance paradigm.
Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common neurodegenerative disorder (26.6 million people worldwide in 2006) that affects the elderly, resulting in profound memory loss and cognitive dysfunction. The aetiology of the disease is complex, but is characterised by two hallmark brain pathologies: aggregates of amyloid plaques, largely composed of amyloid-β peptide (Aβ), and neurofibrillary tangles, formed by hyperphosphorylated tau proteins. The accumulation of Aβ is thought to be the central feature in the progression of AD and, as such, many putative therapies for the treatment of AD are currently targeting inhibition of Aβ production. Aβ is derived from proteolytic cleavage of the membrane bound amyloid precursor protein (APP). APP is processed by two routes, nonamyloidgenic and amyloidgenic. Cleavage of APP by γ-secretase is common to both pathways, but in the former APP is cleaved by an α-secretase to yield soluble APPα. However, in the amyloidgenic route, APP is cleaved by β-secretase to yield soluble APPβ and also Aβ. In vitro studies have shown that mAChR agonists can promote the processing of APP toward the soluble, non-amyloidogenic pathway. In vivo studies showed that the mAChR agonist, AF267B, altered disease-like pathology in the 3×TgAD transgenic mouse, a model of the different components of Alzheimer's disease (Caccamo et al., 2006 Neuron). The mAChR agonist cevimeline has been shown to give a small, but significant, reduction in cerebrospinal fluid levels of Aβ in Alzheimer's patients, thus demonstrating potential disease modifying efficacy (Nitsch et al., 2000 Neurol).
Preclinical studies have suggested that mAChR agonists display an atypical antipsychotic-like profile in a range of pre-clinical paradigms. The mAChR agonist, xanomeline, reverses a number of dopamine mediated behaviours, including amphetamine induced locomotion in rats, apomorphine induced climbing in mice, dopamine agonist driven turning in unilateral 6-OH-DA lesioned rats and amphetamine induced motor unrest in monkeys (without EPS liability). It also has been shown to inhibit A10, but not A9, dopamine cell firing and conditioned avoidance and induces c-fos expression in prefrontal cortex and nucleus accumbens, but not in striatum in rats. These data are all suggestive of an atypical antipsychotic-like profile (Mirza et al., 1999 CNS Drug Rev).
Xanomeline, sabcomeline, milameline and cevimeline have all progressed into various stages of clinical development for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease and/or schizophrenia. Phase II clinical studies with xanomeline demonstrated its efficacy versus various cognitive symptom domains, including behavioural disturbances and hallucinations associated with Alzheimer's disease (Bodick et al., 1997 Arch Neurol). This compound was also assessed in a small Phase II study of schizophrenics and gave a significant reduction in positive and negative symptoms when compared to placebo control (Shekhar et al., 2008 Am J Psych). However, in all clinical studies xanomeline and other related mAChR agonists have displayed an unacceptable safety margin with respect to cholinergic adverse events, including nausea, gastrointestinal pain, diahorrhea, diaphoresis (excessive sweating), hypersalivation (excessive salivation), syncope and bradycardia.
Muscarinic receptors are involved in central and peripheral pain. Pain can be divided into three different types: acute, inflammatory, and neuropathic. Acute pain serves an important protective function in keeping the organism safe from stimuli that may produce tissue damage; however management of post-surgical pain is required. Inflammatory pain may occur for many reasons including tissue damage, autoimmune response, and pathogen invasion and is triggered by the action of inflammatory mediators such as neuropeptides and prostaglandins which result in neuronal inflammation and pain. Neuropathic pain is associated with abnormal painful sensations to non-painful stimuli. Neuropathic pain is associated with a number of different diseases/traumas such as spinal cord injury, multiple sclerosis, diabetes (diabetic neuropathy), viral infection (such as HIV or Herpes). It is also common in cancer both as a result of the disease or a side effect of chemotherapy. Activation of muscarinic receptors has been shown to be analgesic across a number of pain states through the activation of receptors in the spinal cord and higher pain centres in the brain. Increasing endogenous levels of acetylcholine through acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, direct activation of muscarinic receptors with agonists or allosteric modulators has been shown to have analgesic activity. In contrast blockade of muscarinic receptors with antagonists or using knockout mice increases pain sensitivity. Evidence for the role of the M1 receptor in pain is reviewed by D. F. Fiorino and M. Garcia-Guzman, 2012.
More recently, a small number of compounds have been identified which display improved selectivity for the M1 mAChR subtype over the peripherally expressed mAChR subtypes (Bridges et al., 2008 Bioorg Med Chem Lett; Johnson et al., 2010 Bioorg Med Chem Lett; Budzik et al., 2010 ACS Med Chem Lett). Despite increased levels of selectivity versus the M3 mAChR subtype, some of these compounds retain significant agonist activity at both this subtype and the M2 mAChR subtype. Herein we describe a series of compounds which unexpectedly display high levels of selectivity for the M1 and/or M4 mAChR over the M2 and M3 receptor subtypes.